Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not the residency checks?
Makes sense to me..

I think they don’t believe that address fraud is a real problem. Remember, the SB, Gatehouse execs, and Reid have all bought the “all schools are great, FCPS is world class, etc. etc.” hook line and sinker. They are true believers. They don’t see why someone would lie about their address to attend a different school because all the schools are equally great and amazing.

I think it’s a lot more widespread than Gatehouse wants to believe. I knew someone who was letting their niece from Prince William County use their address to attend South County. They didn’t see anything wrong with it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not the residency checks?
Makes sense to me..

I think they don’t believe that address fraud is a real problem. Remember, the SB, Gatehouse execs, and Reid have all bought the “all schools are great, FCPS is world class, etc. etc.” hook line and sinker. They are true believers. They don’t see why someone would lie about their address to attend a different school because all the schools are equally great and amazing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not the residency checks?
Makes sense to me..

Because Reid says there is only one person in the entire county who looks at residency.

Residdncy checks are so simple.

Just bring a utility bill and lease to the school when you pick up schedules. No check, no classes.

They can put up a table at open house manned by the school ofgice staff. Just add it to the 10 other lunes parents wait in that day.

Anonymous wrote:Why not the residency checks?
Makes sense to me..

Anonymous wrote:Everything currently is based on September 2024 enrollments and program capacities.

So I guess your point is if they use stale data and program capacities quickly decline or expand due to a change in Title I status some schools could already be targets for future redistricting shortly after new boundaries are adopted in 2026.

I don’t think that’s the case with Graham Road/Shrevewood/Timber Lane given the current status and proposed boundary changes affecting those schools, but perhaps it’s more of a possibility with other schools like Gunston depending on where they land.

Anonymous wrote:Why not the residency checks?
Makes sense to me..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Attending tonight’s meeting, the Superintendent opened by addressing Hagel Circle and it looks like they’ll be making corrections to the maps to send the kids to their community school of Lorton Station vs Halley (current school) or Gunston (proposed school)

Keep in mind, Lorton Station already has over 700 students. An additional 146 students would lead to overcrowding. Lorton Station is not their community school. Gunston was built at the time Hagel Circle was. That was the original elementary school for Hagel.

Better solution is keeping Gunston or having them go to Halley which both schools could easily handle that amount of students. Keep in mind, there is a reason why Hagel Circle was zoned for Halley, it was a capacity issue.

Gunston is one of the oldest elementary schools in the county. It was built in the 1950s. It was one of the only schools in Lorton! That’s not relevant to today, especially when Lorton has undergone substantial development since the. Gunston doesn’t have the capacity because they’re on a septic system that already has issues. Lorton Station has capacity for 890 students, with approximately 700 current students there is plenty of room for Hagel Circle students to attend the elementary school within walking distance of their home. Lorton Station is also an AAP center - get rid of centers and there is even more space.

Okay, let’s say as you propose Lorton Station Elementary becomes Hagel Circles assigned school. That would mean Gunston Elementary would be well under its capacity. What neighborhood should be added?

Gunston wouldn’t be under capacity. If you looked at the proposal you would see that multiple neighborhoods are being forced out of Gunston under the options to move Hagel Circle from Halley. That was part of the parents concern at the meeting on the 22nd, why was their school targeted to have neighborhoods moved out when Halley Elementary is the school that will end up at 68% enrollment? Even with the neighborhoods being moved out, there is only room for the Hagel Circle kids if Gunston starts using the two dilapidated module units.

Then it came up that if Halley has all of this extra capacity, it can be used for a Korean Immersion program that someone on the school board wants to create.

Also, Hagel Circle can access the Pohick Village townhouse community via walking path which is directly across from Lorton Station elementary. Mateo Dunne even confirmed this during the meeting on the 22nd.

What you are saying about the capacity makes no sense.

Look at the PowerPoint slides provided before the meeting and still available. They did a study and found that there definitely is capacity to handle the Hagel circle community since they assigned Inlet Cove to Island Creek Elementary. They shuffled around some neighborhoods to accommodate so what you’re saying is not believable or able to be backed up with evidence.

Second, let’s say Lorton Station is walkable, why should that be a huge reason why Lorton Station should take it? Lorton station already serves two large apartment complexes which make up the majority of students there. Overcrowding will become an issue and need to be accommodated with six extra trailers. I spoke with Mr. Dunne and he confirmed this.

You know the real reason why most parents objected to it and it was displayed subtlety and blatantly that evening….. it’s because the reputation Hagel Circle has and it’s really unfair to that community to be pushed away.

Honestly, PP you sound like a Lorton Station parent trying to avoid Hagel Circle being rezoned to its community school. So I guess it’s the pot calling the kettle black. Multiple posts have laid out why Gunston isn’t a good option for Hagel Circle, and why the ability to walk to a school is important for the lower income students. If Lorton Station is overcrowded it’s because it’s an AAP center for South County and Hayfield schools. Maybe FCPS can create a center at Halley with all of the excess capacity to alleviate the pressure on Lorton Station so that students who actually live in the community can attend.

I don’t have any issue with Hagel Circle coming to Lorton Station. There already is over 50% of low income and high minority. It wouldn’t change much. It’s the overcrowding that is the issue.

An option would be to have Woods of Fairfax sent to Gunston elementary. That would be a better solution than adding 146 students.

But the real reason why Gunston parents objected was seen that night by all. I hope I can find a taped recording so everyone see the things said about Hagel Circle. It was extremely offensive and has no place at FCPS

There’s a bit more nuance here. Lorton Station is already a Title I school (or at least, it was listed as one in the most recent CIP.) Gunston is not. When capacity numbers are thrown around, Thru is using Program Capacity. Program Capacity chances under Title I status. Gunston would likely become a Title I school under the current proposal, which might have cascading effects.

Unfortunately, nobody seems to be paying attention to these aspects. Graham Road is a prime example. It will loose Title I status under Scenarios 3 and 4, and the poverty will be concentrated at Timber Lane. Shrevewood will also pick up FARM students, but not quite enough for Title I status. They’re shifting around disadvantaged students while losing the resources meant to help them.

What are you saying, what’s your point?

You heard what the administrators said, even becoming a Title 1 school does not adversely affect the level of education. Title 1 status provides additional resources to help students achieve success.

Hagel circle were being taught at Halley Elementary and they were not a Title 1 school.

You make no sense

Program capacity changes when Title I is implemented. They’re proposing scenarios that could change Title I status without tracking how that impacts capacity utilization. I’m not saying one way or the other where students should be moved, but when they shuffle planning areas to utilize Gunston ES to 98%, that capacity could instantly disappear if they need to make program changes to accommodate an influx of Title I students. I don’t think these factors are being considered when they make their recommendations.

Halley, even with Hagel Circle does not qualify for Title I, so the same concerns do not apply.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the main takeaways from the McLean Madison meeting tonight? I heard several hundred people attended between in person and online!

It was fairly calm.

Ratio of Madison comments to McLean comments felt like 3:1.

Lots of Westbriar parents zoned to Madison objecting to getting moved to Marshall under Scenario 4. Sounds like they’ll get their wish.

Lots of Wolftrap parents zoned to Marshall favoring getting moved to Madison under Scenario 4. Sounds like they’ll get their wish.

Lots of Timber Lane parents north of 29 expressing appreciation that Scenario 4 keeps them at Longfellow/McLean. Sounds like they’ll get their wish.

A few Fairhill ES parents advocating to get moved from Falls Church to Madison or Oakton. Reid was non-committal because the parents couldn’t say how many kids were involved.

A fair number of Lemon Road parents zoned for McLean and Marshall spoke in favor of retaining the split feeder, which Scenario 4 does. They are a bit unsettled because there are some Lemon Road parents in Pimmit Hills lobbying to get moved from Marshall to McLean by eliminating the split feeder, which in turn has prompted some other parents at Lemon Road to argue that, if the split feeder is to be eliminated, FCPS should move the McLean families at Lemon Road to Marshall, rather than vice versa. The parents speaking tonight want to keep the current split feeder.

No comments at all that I can recall from anyone in the Spring Hill island, so it seems fair to assume they’re happy to move from McLean to Langley.

The most interesting part of the meeting may have been when Meren, who was there, seemed to chastise Reid about Reid’s answer to a question about whether current 8th graders would have a choice between their current high school and the high school to which they may be rezoned.

Lots of comments about whether split feeders are bad or ok, and it came across as rather contrived and dependent on how it impacted the schools that people want their kids to attend. Reid said they are looking at split feeders on a case-by-case basis now, depending on the feedback provided, and backing away from a one-size-fits-all approach.

I was surprised Meren didn’t seem aware of the transfer/pupil placement process. She seemed clueless and uninformed while Reid correctly informed the father of his options for his son. Didn’t give me much confidence in Meren.

Meren posted a video on her Facebook page last night basically throwing Reid under the bus, saying that the school board supervises Reid and that Reid was operating outside of her lane by saying information that had not been authorized or agreed upon by the board.

Good for Meren.

I was at the WSHS meeting.

Brac map 4 is probably the best map they could have created for WSHS. Even though I think no one should be moved into WSHS, if I were honest, I would have to say that even tho RV part makes sense.

But as the night went on, Reid started to overtly imply that if they complained loudly enough on the boundary map tool, that Sangster would get to stay at WSHS and they might need to revisit map 3. (Creating a split feeder at Hunt Valley?)

For every complaint and point that speakers made, Reid just smiled, nodded affirmatively, and implied that she agreed with the poster. Every single time.

She is the figurehead of FCPS and is paid $400,000 each year by us the taxpayers to do the hard thing.

We are 2 years into this process and on our 4th map revision.

At this point, Dr. Reid should have had hard factual answers to parents questions that have been asked for 2 years straight, not "I just looked at the transfer data into WSHS yesterday becsuse I knew someone would ask."

At this point in the process, she should have stood up like a leader in front of the very civil and respectful WSHS parents, and told them what FCPS told the BRAC committee reps, which is " Unfortunately, someone is going to get rezoned out of WSHS. If the Brac committee does not come up with enough students to meet our satisfaction, then the schoolboard and superintendent will pick who gets rezoned." Then stand up for the BRAC committee and tell those parents that the BRAC committee tried to pick the smallest number of houses to be rezoned to meet their mandate, and tried to find neighborhoods that could go to the most equivalent high school (Lake Braddock) with the biggest community connection to WSHS and the students getting moved, with the best transportation options.

Stand by the BRAC committee.

The Springfield BRAC members created the best possible map for WSHS with Map 4. Any one who knows the area, knows the schools, and knows the communities involved knows this, if they were perfectly honest, as long as the Irving 8th graders get the same grandfathering as the LB secondary school 8th graders get.

Show some leadership and support the volunteers who have managed to pull off an impossible tasking in a way that gives the best possible outcome for ALL of the WSHS students, including the Sangster split feeder, even if it will be a big disappointment to them. By next year, when all the Sangster 6th graders move to Lake Braddock together for midfle school, and with the Sangster elementary classes going forward, this will be just a blip in their memory, other than people wondering why they fought this at all.

If Reid caved this immediately to the very, very civil WSHS parents, what on earth is she doing when she faces parents who are riled up?

All of this is so accurate. I went to the meeting too and the more I thought about it afterwards, the more upset I got about the way these parents talked about LBSS, the rest of Sangster, and the other families they live near (even if you can’t walk to their house). I would like to hear from the actual elementary kids at Sangster, and hear how they feel about splitting from most of their cohort. My child would have been incredibly upset if the HV split had gone through, because she doesn’t care about going to Irving, but she would have cared deeply about her best buddies being moved to a different school after 6. She had a hard time making friends and the few she has are south of 286 (yep, we are friends across a natural boundary!).

If they could grandfather all middle schoolers, this should be a no-brainer. I still don’t like the RV move (think moving it all to Lewis made more sense but not going to throw them under the bus and understand why they wouldn’t want to do that) since it offsets the gains from the LBSS shifts. But I don’t get the outrage. The time difference is so small as to be negligible (45 hours a year?!). LBSS and WSHS are really two schools in one community. We are friends with people from both school pyramids and do activities in both addresses (in fact some maps call our West Springfield address Burke!). It’s a losing argument.

Do you know the boundaries of Rolling Valley? There is no way you could move that school all to Lewis. It literally carves out the whole center of the circle that is the WSHS boundary. Kids who go to Rolling Valley literally live in WSHS's backyard.
But I agree with using scenario 3 for Rolling Valley (not for Hunt Valley) that takes the split feeder kids out of Rolling Valley and moves them to Saratoga where they would move on to Key and Lewis as they always have, but now with a real cohort of kids.

She was talking about the Rolling Valley parts affected by Map 3 and 4, not Rolling Valley proper that currently attends WSHS

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Attending tonight’s meeting, the Superintendent opened by addressing Hagel Circle and it looks like they’ll be making corrections to the maps to send the kids to their community school of Lorton Station vs Halley (current school) or Gunston (proposed school)

Keep in mind, Lorton Station already has over 700 students. An additional 146 students would lead to overcrowding. Lorton Station is not their community school. Gunston was built at the time Hagel Circle was. That was the original elementary school for Hagel.

Better solution is keeping Gunston or having them go to Halley which both schools could easily handle that amount of students. Keep in mind, there is a reason why Hagel Circle was zoned for Halley, it was a capacity issue.

Gunston is one of the oldest elementary schools in the county. It was built in the 1950s. It was one of the only schools in Lorton! That’s not relevant to today, especially when Lorton has undergone substantial development since the. Gunston doesn’t have the capacity because they’re on a septic system that already has issues. Lorton Station has capacity for 890 students, with approximately 700 current students there is plenty of room for Hagel Circle students to attend the elementary school within walking distance of their home. Lorton Station is also an AAP center - get rid of centers and there is even more space.

Okay, let’s say as you propose Lorton Station Elementary becomes Hagel Circles assigned school. That would mean Gunston Elementary would be well under its capacity. What neighborhood should be added?

Gunston wouldn’t be under capacity. If you looked at the proposal you would see that multiple neighborhoods are being forced out of Gunston under the options to move Hagel Circle from Halley. That was part of the parents concern at the meeting on the 22nd, why was their school targeted to have neighborhoods moved out when Halley Elementary is the school that will end up at 68% enrollment? Even with the neighborhoods being moved out, there is only room for the Hagel Circle kids if Gunston starts using the two dilapidated module units.

Then it came up that if Halley has all of this extra capacity, it can be used for a Korean Immersion program that someone on the school board wants to create.

Also, Hagel Circle can access the Pohick Village townhouse community via walking path which is directly across from Lorton Station elementary. Mateo Dunne even confirmed this during the meeting on the 22nd.

What you are saying about the capacity makes no sense.

Look at the PowerPoint slides provided before the meeting and still available. They did a study and found that there definitely is capacity to handle the Hagel circle community since they assigned Inlet Cove to Island Creek Elementary. They shuffled around some neighborhoods to accommodate so what you’re saying is not believable or able to be backed up with evidence.

Second, let’s say Lorton Station is walkable, why should that be a huge reason why Lorton Station should take it? Lorton station already serves two large apartment complexes which make up the majority of students there. Overcrowding will become an issue and need to be accommodated with six extra trailers. I spoke with Mr. Dunne and he confirmed this.

You know the real reason why most parents objected to it and it was displayed subtlety and blatantly that evening….. it’s because the reputation Hagel Circle has and it’s really unfair to that community to be pushed away.

Honestly, PP you sound like a Lorton Station parent trying to avoid Hagel Circle being rezoned to its community school. So I guess it’s the pot calling the kettle black. Multiple posts have laid out why Gunston isn’t a good option for Hagel Circle, and why the ability to walk to a school is important for the lower income students. If Lorton Station is overcrowded it’s because it’s an AAP center for South County and Hayfield schools. Maybe FCPS can create a center at Halley with all of the excess capacity to alleviate the pressure on Lorton Station so that students who actually live in the community can attend.

I don’t have any issue with Hagel Circle coming to Lorton Station. There already is over 50% of low income and high minority. It wouldn’t change much. It’s the overcrowding that is the issue.

An option would be to have Woods of Fairfax sent to Gunston elementary. That would be a better solution than adding 146 students.

But the real reason why Gunston parents objected was seen that night by all. I hope I can find a taped recording so everyone see the things said about Hagel Circle. It was extremely offensive and has no place at FCPS

There’s a bit more nuance here. Lorton Station is already a Title I school (or at least, it was listed as one in the most recent CIP.) Gunston is not. When capacity numbers are thrown around, Thru is using Program Capacity. Program Capacity chances under Title I status. Gunston would likely become a Title I school under the current proposal, which might have cascading effects.

Unfortunately, nobody seems to be paying attention to these aspects. Graham Road is a prime example. It will loose Title I status under Scenarios 3 and 4, and the poverty will be concentrated at Timber Lane. Shrevewood will also pick up FARM students, but not quite enough for Title I status. They’re shifting around disadvantaged students while losing the resources meant to help them.

What are you saying, what’s your point?

You heard what the administrators said, even becoming a Title 1 school does not adversely affect the level of education. Title 1 status provides additional resources to help students achieve success.

Hagel circle were being taught at Halley Elementary and they were not a Title 1 school.

You make no sense

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are the other Sangster families offended, puzzled or amused by the whole the Sangster kids who go to Lake Braddock aren't our community argument?

There is definitely talk in surrounding communities about that angle, not about the kids at Irving but the families without kids at Irving.

One LB parent spoke up 2 meetings ago about that argument, and she did seem a bit offended and a little befuddled.

Why would you consider kids who went to school with your kid for 6+ years to be part of your community? One kid spoke at the Irving meeting about how he desperately didn't want to lose all of the new friends he's met (in one quarter of school) this year at Irving and pleaded to stay there instead of being sent to LBSS, where his former Sangster classmates of seven years went.

You are talking about and mocking a child. What you failed to mention is that he said he has a sibling at WSHS, so of course that school would feel more like his community than LB.

Sangster is located within the WSHS boundary. It is inside the neighborhood of Orange Hunt Estates. Those of us who live there understand that we are assigned to Sangster as the elementary school because we are walkers. We would have to be bused to Orange Hunt Elementary. The Sangster/Orange Hunt boundary is at the point 1 mile from the school. So that is why we identify as living in West Springfield and see Irving/West Springfield as our child’s school. The first iteration of the boundary scenarios did not “fix” our split feeder because Sangster is located within the WSHS boundary. And we don’t want our split feeder fixed.

There are better solutions to overcrowding at WSHS. Shifting children living on West Springfield/Lewis boundary to Lewis, which has room. Moving German immersion (Did you know Orange Hunt is over capacity too thanks to transfers in for German immersion???) to White Oaks and Lake Braddock pyramid, which have room.

But really let’s wait and see. West Springfield is full of government civilians. Let’s see what happens with Trump and his downsizing of the government workforce. Families are going to have to leave for other employment opportunities.

The Orange Hunt community will be pi$$ed if Sangster parents get their German immersion program moved out of their school just so the Sangster island can avoid Lake Braddock.

The vast majority of German immersion students actually live in bounds for Orange Hunt. A large number of them have German heritage or were stationed in Germany with bilingual kids, and bought their houses zoned for Orange Hunt so they didn't have to risk the lottery.

Ask those Orange Hunt families if they want to give up their German immersion program so Sangster doesn't have to go to Lake Braddock. You are going to get a resounding no.

Slides from this summer show 122 transfer into Orange Hunt (German Immersion, there are no special education programs there) making it overcrowded. Shift that whole program to White Oaks and the overcrowding problem is solved. White Oaks close to Orange Hunt anyway. Also, let’s be real. Language immersion is for pole whose kids can’t get into AAP to feel special. And then you don’t have to move the Sangster/Irving/West Springfield kids out of the neighborhood schools.

Our section of the Sangster zone is separated from the rest of Lake Braddock by Fairfax County Parkway and Lee Chapel. It is separated from the rest of West Springfield by NOTHING. It’s literally the same street (Cottontail Ct.). A neighborhood pool is not a natural boundary, but a 4-lane highway is.

Sangster itself is located in ORANGE HUNT ESTATES. It is located in the WSHS boundary.

Also, moving Sangster and shifting families to White Oaks (and Cherry Run apparently) does not solve the overcrowding issue at WSHS. And creates new overcrowding at LB on the HS side. It’s not a solution. It’s sacrificing some children so no one has to move to Lewis. But Dr. Reid said on Monday night that Lewis has capacity - the most of any HS. So any solution that does not move some children to Lewis is not a really solution.

But I think first we need a WSHS boundary audit. Everyone show up with your deed and your lease. Let’s check them all and see what we find. They need to demand actual paperwork from every family. Show me that you own it and currently pay the utilities.

So much for Sangster families not throwing other WSHS neighborhoods under the bus. Look out Daventry and Hunt Valley, the Sangster/Orange Hunt mommies want your kids sent to Lewis. Don’t believe the posters who say they aren’t actively working to get your kids moved.

No one is politically dumb enough to propose moving a WSHS neighborhood to/back into Lewis at this stage in the game.

The Sangster parents appear to be pushing this exact thing.

Daventry and Hunt Valley need to get engaged and start submitting comments supporting Map 4

Your fear mongering is more than transparent. Sangster parents have been thoughtful and respectful through the process (one rouge poster, or perhaps a troll claiming to be a Sangster parent) does not represent their organized beliefs. I believe strongly that the organized group has thoughtfully navigated their advocacy to be inclusive, not exclusive. It's not useful to debate things in this forum, but I'm disappointed in you as a poster for continuing to help perpetuate this false narrative.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were sooooo stupid to mandate a county wide boundary rezoning every 5 years

That's a ridiculous frequency for rezoning. They are going to spend all their time rezoning and never executing.

Anonymous wrote:They were sooooo stupid to mandate a county wide boundary rezoning every 5 years

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Attending tonight’s meeting, the Superintendent opened by addressing Hagel Circle and it looks like they’ll be making corrections to the maps to send the kids to their community school of Lorton Station vs Halley (current school) or Gunston (proposed school)

Keep in mind, Lorton Station already has over 700 students. An additional 146 students would lead to overcrowding. Lorton Station is not their community school. Gunston was built at the time Hagel Circle was. That was the original elementary school for Hagel.

Better solution is keeping Gunston or having them go to Halley which both schools could easily handle that amount of students. Keep in mind, there is a reason why Hagel Circle was zoned for Halley, it was a capacity issue.

Gunston is one of the oldest elementary schools in the county. It was built in the 1950s. It was one of the only schools in Lorton! That’s not relevant to today, especially when Lorton has undergone substantial development since the. Gunston doesn’t have the capacity because they’re on a septic system that already has issues. Lorton Station has capacity for 890 students, with approximately 700 current students there is plenty of room for Hagel Circle students to attend the elementary school within walking distance of their home. Lorton Station is also an AAP center - get rid of centers and there is even more space.

Okay, let’s say as you propose Lorton Station Elementary becomes Hagel Circles assigned school. That would mean Gunston Elementary would be well under its capacity. What neighborhood should be added?

Gunston wouldn’t be under capacity. If you looked at the proposal you would see that multiple neighborhoods are being forced out of Gunston under the options to move Hagel Circle from Halley. That was part of the parents concern at the meeting on the 22nd, why was their school targeted to have neighborhoods moved out when Halley Elementary is the school that will end up at 68% enrollment? Even with the neighborhoods being moved out, there is only room for the Hagel Circle kids if Gunston starts using the two dilapidated module units.

Then it came up that if Halley has all of this extra capacity, it can be used for a Korean Immersion program that someone on the school board wants to create.

Also, Hagel Circle can access the Pohick Village townhouse community via walking path which is directly across from Lorton Station elementary. Mateo Dunne even confirmed this during the meeting on the 22nd.

What you are saying about the capacity makes no sense.

Look at the PowerPoint slides provided before the meeting and still available. They did a study and found that there definitely is capacity to handle the Hagel circle community since they assigned Inlet Cove to Island Creek Elementary. They shuffled around some neighborhoods to accommodate so what you’re saying is not believable or able to be backed up with evidence.

Second, let’s say Lorton Station is walkable, why should that be a huge reason why Lorton Station should take it? Lorton station already serves two large apartment complexes which make up the majority of students there. Overcrowding will become an issue and need to be accommodated with six extra trailers. I spoke with Mr. Dunne and he confirmed this.

You know the real reason why most parents objected to it and it was displayed subtlety and blatantly that evening….. it’s because the reputation Hagel Circle has and it’s really unfair to that community to be pushed away.

Honestly, PP you sound like a Lorton Station parent trying to avoid Hagel Circle being rezoned to its community school. So I guess it’s the pot calling the kettle black. Multiple posts have laid out why Gunston isn’t a good option for Hagel Circle, and why the ability to walk to a school is important for the lower income students. If Lorton Station is overcrowded it’s because it’s an AAP center for South County and Hayfield schools. Maybe FCPS can create a center at Halley with all of the excess capacity to alleviate the pressure on Lorton Station so that students who actually live in the community can attend.

I don’t have any issue with Hagel Circle coming to Lorton Station. There already is over 50% of low income and high minority. It wouldn’t change much. It’s the overcrowding that is the issue.

An option would be to have Woods of Fairfax sent to Gunston elementary. That would be a better solution than adding 146 students.

But the real reason why Gunston parents objected was seen that night by all. I hope I can find a taped recording so everyone see the things said about Hagel Circle. It was extremely offensive and has no place at FCPS

There’s a bit more nuance here. Lorton Station is already a Title I school (or at least, it was listed as one in the most recent CIP.) Gunston is not. When capacity numbers are thrown around, Thru is using Program Capacity. Program Capacity chances under Title I status. Gunston would likely become a Title I school under the current proposal, which might have cascading effects.

Unfortunately, nobody seems to be paying attention to these aspects. Graham Road is a prime example. It will loose Title I status under Scenarios 3 and 4, and the poverty will be concentrated at Timber Lane. Shrevewood will also pick up FARM students, but not quite enough for Title I status. They’re shifting around disadvantaged students while losing the resources meant to help them.